PhD in Health

Comprehensive Exam Guidelines

Process Map

Committee
provides
Process should take place
feedback/
over 3 month period
remedial plan FAIL

Committee Program Student Student submits Committee

Agree on Establish Oral
prepares five Coordinator receives 6 WKS
15-20 page evaluates P/F PASS
core area Comps Defense4
questions reviews and questions response to written Written
of study Committee1
and key approves chooses responses4
each question
references2 questions three3
FAIL 2nd ATTEMPT FAIL
Student and
Supervisory
Committee Timeline should be
Academic FAIL 2nd P/F
recorded in program
withdrawal ATTEMPT Oral
database

NOTES: PASS
• Items in purple are points at which the PHD Health office should be notified: phdhealth@dal.ca
• Please refer to the applicable section of the attached guidelines for details:
1
See section D Successful
2
See Section E completion
3
see section F
4
Evaluation forms attached
PhD in Health Program
Comprehensive Exam (HLTH 8000) Guidelines

A. Purpose

The purpose of the Comprehensive Examination is for the PhD in Health candidate to demonstrate
the background preparation necessary for the successful completion and defense of their doctoral
dissertation. Its intent is both normative and pedagogical: serving as a mid-degree check on
candidate’s knowledge, understanding synthesis and analytical skills in their area of research
appropriate to the doctoral degree. Furthermore, it will assist in preparing the candidate to write
and successfully defend a quality PhD dissertation.

This examination will normally occur at approximately the 1.5-2-year point of the PhD program after
the area of study for the dissertation has been defined and the coursework completed. The
candidate should demonstrate: (i) evidence of substantial understanding of the core knowledge
areas related to the dissertation subject area; (ii) evidence of good scholarship including a command
of the literature, use of primary references, originality of written text and thought, intellectual
honesty; (iii) appropriateness of answers given demonstrating a level suitable to the doctoral
degree; (iv) ability to analyze the pertinent literature and synthesize the broader concepts; (v) grasp
of the broader issues in scientific and health knowledge surrounding the specific dissertation
research topic and how they bear on the dissertation research.

B. Objectives

(i) To ensure by written and oral examination that the candidate is in command of the
multidisciplinary literature broadly underpinning his/her dissertation. If not, then areas of
deficiency should be identified and the necessary remedial action taken to gain this knowledge.

(ii) To provide a quality check on the candidate's approach to their science/research, and their
ability to function at a high level of scholarship consistent with the academic model for the
highest degree the university awards including intellectual rigor and honesty.

C. Preparation of the Candidate

By the end of the first year of study (second in the case of students enrolled in the 3 year residency
program) the candidate should reach agreement with the Supervisory Committee on the core areas
of study that underpin the proposed dissertation. Discussion should begin at this point regarding
possible external members of the examining committee.

D. Membership of the Examination Committee

The Comprehensive Examination committee will consist of the candidate’s Supervisory Committee,
plus at least one other faculty member who is a member of the Faculty of Graduate Studies and who
holds an appointment in the Faculty of Health. The external member need not have specific
expertise in the student’s area of research. The primary role is to assist in ensuring that questions
 are varied, appropriate and framed to evaluate the student’s research and capability from a broader
context related to the WHO definition of Health.

E. Guidelines for Question Development

The examination will take the form of five questions, which should reflect the specific areas for
intensive study of the literature prior to the examination.

(i) Members of the Comprehensive Examination Committee with specific expertise in one or more
of the core areas specified for study (in section C above) should be identified and asked to draft
one or more questions specific to their area. The questions posed should require the candidate
to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the topic, and abilities to analyze, synthesize, and
interpret the literature.
(ii) Questions should be reviewed by all members of the Comprehensive Examination Committee to
ensure that the scope of the exam addresses the topics identified.
(iii) Students are not to participate directly in the development of questions.
(iv) Members of the Comprehensive Examination committee may provide key references related to
any or all of the questions but this is not a requirement.
(v) The questions must be approved by the PhD in Health Program Coordinator approximately two
weeks in advance of the scheduled exam.
(vi) Sample questions will be made available upon request of the Supervisor to the Program
Assistant.

F. Procedure for Comprehensive Examination

At the time of the exam it is expected that the candidate will be familiar with the literature on the
topics selected for examination as they will have at minimum a general understanding of the
pertinent dissertation topic areas. The examination will focus on augmenting this knowledge,
demonstrating the candidate’s ability to critically analyze the literature, synthesize that information,
and directly answer the questions posed. The candidate should anticipate that he/she will be
required to devote their academic time exclusively to the examination during the 6-week
examination period in order to provide quality written documents and then successfully defend
those documents and his/her knowledge at the oral examination.

Written Examination:
On an agreed upon date, the candidate will be presented by their Supervisor with the five questions
approved by the Comprehensive Examination Committee and PhD in Health Coordinator. He/she
will then choose three (3) of these questions and will answer them in three corresponding original,
scholarly documents of 15-20 pages in length. Each document will have the format of a scientific
journal review paper and the candidate will have 6 weeks to complete all three documents before
submitting them to the Comprehensive Examination Committee for review. Students may hand
completed documents back to the committee prior to the end of the 6-week period, however no
feedback will be provided until the exam period is complete.

PHDH Comprehensive Exam Guidelines 2 2018-04-05

 If and only if all three documents are judged by the Comprehensive Examination Committee as
meeting the standards for the examination, the candidate will be invited to defend the documents
and his/her background knowledge in an oral examination.

Please note that while the supervisory committee and student may wish to structure the written
examination in a format that could result in a research ‘product’ (e.g., peer reviewed publication),
this is not a requirement of the comprehensive examination process, nor is it a criteria by which the
responses will be evaluated.

Oral Examination:
The chair for this examination will be one of the committee members as chosen by consensus. For
each of the 3 documents submitted and graded in the written component, the candidate will have
5 minutes to provide an overview of their response (format to be decided by the candidate and may
include a presentation). This 5 minute overview will be followed by a ~ 40 minute round of
questioning, beginning with the external member and then the Supervisory Committee.

Successful examination will be based on consideration of both the written documents and the oral
defense.

G. Evaluation of the Written Documents and Oral Examination

Written Document:

Evaluation of the written documents is to be completed prior to the candidate moving forward to
the oral examination using the appropriate form(s) and as per the details below. It is recommended
that this fillable PDF be completed by the Supervisor on behalf of the Comprehensive Exam
Committee following deliberations regarding the written portion of the exam.

1. Did the candidate answer the questions posed?

2. Did the documents satisfy the expected level of academic performance as described in the
second paragraph of Section A above.
3. Was the document written at grammatical and scientific levels as would be expected to write a
successful PhD dissertation?

In adjudicating the documents, the Comprehensive Examination Committee will seek consensus of
opinion in answering questions 1–3 above for each document submitted. In the case where
consensus is not achieved, a majority vote will rule. If there is an even number of committee
members, a majority vote amongst the members— excluding the Supervisor—will rule.

In the case where one or more documents are judged to not meet the standards of the examination,
the candidate will be given an opportunity to revise the document (s) The time frame for the
revisions or re-examination will be agreed between the candidate and the Comprehensive
Examination committee, but is not to exceed the initial time allotted for the written component (i.e.,
6 weeks). If the committee deems a specific course of action is required to aid the candidate in
remediating the written component of the comprehensive exam, a request to delay the start date of
the remedial may be made to the PhD in Health Coordinator. As is deemed appropriate, the

PHDH Comprehensive Exam Guidelines 3 2018-04-05

 Committee members should provide detailed guidance to the candidate regarding improvement of
the documents and/or oral examination performance toward successful adjudication.

Successful written examination will be achieved by approval of all three documents submitted.
Failure to achieve this approval after two rounds of submission will be considered a failure. Failure
would thus be grounds for the candidate’s withdrawal from the PhD program in Health.

Oral Examination:

Evaluation of the oral examination is to be completed using the appropriate form(s) and as per the
details below. It is recommended that the fillable portion of this form be completed in advance and
at least one printed copy brought to the student’s oral examination meeting for completion following
deliberations.

1. Did the candidate provide convincing answers to the questions posed during the oral
examination?
2. Did the answers to the questions posed during the examination satisfy the expected level of
academic performance as described in the second paragraph of Section A above.
3. Was the candidate able to support his/her answers with evidence from the literature?
4. Was the candidate able to engage in scientific dialogue appropriate to function in scientific
meetings, presentations, etc.?

In adjudicating the oral examination, the Comprehensive Examination Committee will seek
consensus of opinion in answering questions 1–4 above for each document submitted. In the case
where consensus is not achieved, a majority vote will rule. If there is an even number of committee
members, a majority vote amongst the members—excluding the Supervisor—will rule.

If the answers to questions 1-4 for the oral examination are judged to not meet the standard for all
three documents, the candidate will be given an opportunity to re-sit the exam. Failure to achieve
approval of the oral examination performance in the two rounds will also be considered a failure.
Failure would thus be grounds for the candidate’s withdrawal from the PhD program in Health.

H. Post-examination Remediation
In keeping with the pedagogical objectives of the Comprehensive Examination, the Committee may
follow the examination with recommendation of remedial work for the candidate, the objective
being to optimize the likelihood of success in writing the PhD dissertation and in its oral defense.
Such remedial work may consist of:

(i) directed study of certain areas of the literature to supplement perceived areas of weakness;
(ii) additional coursework; or
(iii) other work as is deemed appropriate. The remedial work will be carried out under the
guidance of the Supervisor and the Supervisory Committee.

PHDH Comprehensive Exam Guidelines 4 2018-04-05

PhD in Health Program
Comprehensive Exam Evaluation Form
Written Component

Student: ________________________ Date Questions Received by Student: _______________________

Date Questions Due to Committee: _______________________

Overall Purpose
The purpose of the Comprehensive Examination is for the Ph.D. candidates in Health to demonstrate that
they have the background preparation necessary for the successful completion and defense of their
doctoral dissertation. Its intent is both normative and pedagogical: serving as a mid-degree check on
candidate’s knowledge, understanding synthesis and analytical skills in their area of research appropriate
to the doctoral degree. Furthermore, it will assist in preparing the candidate to write and successfully
defend a quality PhD dissertation.

The candidate should demonstrate:

i. evidence of substantial understanding of the core knowledge areas related to the
dissertation subject area;
ii. evidence of good scholarship including a command of the literature, use of primary
references, originality of written text and thought, intellectual honesty;
iii. appropriateness of answers given demonstrating a level suitable to the doctoral degree;
iv. ability to analyze the pertinent literature and synthesize the broader concepts;
v. an understanding of the broader issues in scientific and health knowledge surrounding the specific
dissertation research topic and how they bear on the dissertation research.

Evaluation of the written documents

In adjudicating the documents, the Comprehensive Examination Committee will seek consensus of opinion in
answering questions 1–3 in each document submitted. In the case where consensus is not achieved, a majority
vote will rule. If there is an even number of committee members, a majority vote amongst the members,
excluding the Supervisor, will rule.

Does Not Meet Meets Exceeds

EVALUATION CRITERIA Expectations Expectations Expectations

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3
1. Did the candidate answer the questions posed?

2. Did the documents satisfy the expected level

of academic performance?

3. Was the document written at grammatical and

scientific levels as would be expected for a
successful PhD dissertation?
Comments:

Post-examination remediation
In the case where one or more documents are judged to not meet the standards of the examination, the
candidate will be given an opportunity to revise the document(s).

Successful written examination will be achieved by approval of all documents submitted. All documents must
receive a minimum rating of satisfactory to be deemed successful. Failure to achieve approval after two rounds
will be considered a failure. Failure would thus be grounds for the recommendation that the candidate
withdrawal from the PhD in Health program.

Please see PhD Health Comprehensive Exam Guidelines document for further details.

WRITTEN COMPONENT RESULT

PASS FIRST FAILURE 2ND ATTEMPT FINAL FAILURE

(Co)Supervisor:
(Co)Supervisor:
Committee Member:
Committee Member:
Committee Member:
Committee Member:
Student:
Print Name Signature

NOTE: All FGS regulations regarding comprehensive examinations as outlined in the Graduate Calendar must
be adhered to.

Once complete, please submit this form to PhDHealth@dal.ca for processing.

PHDH Comprehensive Exam Written Evaluation Form 2018-04-05

PhD in Health Program
Comprehensive Exam Evaluation Form
Oral Defense

Student: ________________________ Date of Oral Defense: _______________________

Overall Purpose
The purpose of the Comprehensive Examination is for the Ph.D. candidates in Health to demonstrate that
they have the background preparation necessary for the successful completion and defense of their
doctoral dissertation. Its intent is both normative and pedagogical: serving as a mid-degree check on
candidate’s knowledge, understanding synthesis and analytical skills in their area of research appropriate
to the doctoral degree. Furthermore, it will assist in preparing the candidate to write and successfully
defend a quality PhD dissertation.

The candidate should demonstrate:

i. evidence of substantial understanding of the core knowledge areas related to the
dissertation subject area;
ii. evidence of good scholarship including a command of the literature, use of primary
references, originality of written text and thought, intellectual honesty;
iii. appropriateness of answers given demonstrating a level suitable to the doctoral degree;
iv. ability to analyze the pertinent literature and synthesize the broader concepts;
v. an understanding of the broader issues in scientific and health knowledge surrounding the specific
dissertation research topic and how they bear on the dissertation research.

Evaluation of the oral defense

In adjudicating the oral examination, the Comprehensive Examination Committee will seek consensus of
opinion in answering questions 1–4 for each document submitted. In the case where consensus is not
achieved, a majority vote will rule. If there is an even number of committee members, a majority vote amongst
the members—excluding the Supervisor—will rule.

Does Not Meet Meets Exceeds

EVALUATION CRITERIA Expectations Expectations Expectations

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q1 Q2 Q3
1. How well did the candidate answer the questions
posed during the oral examination?
2. Did the answers satisfy the expected level of
academic performance?

3. Was the candidate able to support his/her

answers with evidence from the literature?

4. Was the candidate able to engage in scientific

dialogue appropriate to function in scientific
meetings, presentations, etc.?
Comments:
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________

Post-examination remediation

In the case where responses to questions about one or more documents for the oral examination are judged to
not meet the standard, the candidate will be given an opportunity to re-sit the oral exam.

Failure to achieve approval of the oral examination performance in the two rounds will be considered a
failure. Failure would thus be grounds for the recommendation that the candidate withdrawal from the PhD
in Health program.

Please see PhD Health Comprehensive Exam Guidelines document for further details.

ORAL COMPONENT RESULT

 PASS  FIRST FAILURE 2nd ATTEMPT ___________________  FINAL FAILURE

(Co)Supervisor:
(Co)Supervisor:
Committee Member:
Committee Member:
Committee Member:
Committee Member:
Student:
Print Name Signature

NOTE: All FGS regulations regarding comprehensive examinations as outlined in the Graduate Calendar must
be adhered to.

Once complete, please submit this form to PhDHealth@dal.ca for processing.

PHDH Comprehensive Exam Oral Defense Evaluation Form 2018-04-05